One 77-year-old’s search for the truth: 9/11, election fraud, illegal wars, Wall Street criminality, a stolen nuke, the neocon wars, control of the U.S. government by global corporations, the unjustified assault on Social Security, media complicity, and the "Great Recession" about to become the second Great Depression. "The most important truths are hidden from us by the powerful few who strive to steal the American dream by keeping We the People in the dark."

Can The World Survive Washington’s Hubris?

When President Reagan nominated me as Assistant Secretary of the
Treasury for Economic Policy, he told me that we had to restore the US
economy, to rescue it from stagflation, in order to bring the full
weight of a powerful economy to bear on the Soviet leadership, in order
to convince them to negotiate the end of the cold war. Reagan said that
there was no reason to live any longer under the threat of nuclear war.

The Reagan administration achieved both goals, only to see these
accomplishments discarded by successor administrations. It was Reagan’s
own vice president and successor, George Herbert Walker Bush, who first
violated the Reagan-Gorbachev understandings by incorporating former
constituent parts of the Soviet Empire into NATO and taking Western
military bases to the Russian frontier.

The process of surrounding Russia with military bases continued
unabated through successor US administrations with various “color
revolutions” financed by the US National Endowment for Democracy,
regarded by many as a front for the CIA. Washington even attempted to
install a Washington-controlled government in Ukraine and did succeed in
this effort in former Soviet Georgia, the birthplace of Joseph Stalin.

The President of Georgia, a country located between the Black Sea and
the Caspian Sea, is a Washington puppet. Recently, he announced that
former Soviet Georgia is on schedule to become a NATO member in 2014.

Those old enough to remember know that NATO, the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization, was an alliance between Western Europe and the US
against the threat of the Red Army overrunning Western Europe. The North
Atlantic is a long, long ways from the Black and Caspian Seas. What is
the purpose of Georgia being a NATO member except to give Washington a
military base on the Russian underbelly?

The evidence is simply overwhelming that Washington–both parties–have
Russia and China targeted. Whether the purpose is to destroy both
countries or merely to render them unable to oppose Washington’s world
hegemony is unclear at this time. Regardless of the purpose, nuclear war
is the likely outcome.

The presstitute American press pretends that an evil Syrian
government is murdering innocent citizens who only want democracy and
that if the UN won’t intervene militarily, the US must in order to save
human rights. Russia and China are vilified by US functionaries for
opposing any pretext for a NATO invasion of Syria.

The facts, of course, are different from those presented by the
presstitute American media and members of the US government. The Syrian
“rebels” are well armed with military weapons. The “rebels” are battling
the Syrian army. The rebels massacre civilians and report to their
media whores in the West that the deed was done by the Syrian
government, and the Western presstitutes spread the propaganda.

Someone is arming the “rebels” as obviously the weapons can’t be
purchased in local Syrian markets. Most intelligent people believe the
weapons are coming from the US or from US surrogates.

So, Washington has started a civil war in Syria, as it did in Libya,
but this time the gullible Russians and Chinese have caught on and have
refused to permit a UN resolution like the one the West exploited
against Gaddafi.

To get around this roadblock, fish out an ancient Phantom fighter jet
from the 1960s Vietnam war era and have Turkey fly it into Syria. The
Syrians will shoot it down, and then Turkey can appeal to its NATO
allies to come to its aid against Syria. Denied the UN option,
Washington can invoke its obligation under the NATO treaty, and go to
war in defense of a NATO member against a demonized Syria.

The neoconservative lie behind Washington’s wars of hegemony is that
the US is bringing democracy to the invaded and bombed countries. To
paraphrase Mao, “democracy comes out of the barrel of a gun.” However,
the Arab Spring has come up short on democracy, as have Iraq and
Afghanistan, two countries “liberated” by US democratic invasions.

What the US is bringing is civil wars and the breakup of countries,
as President Bill Clinton’s regime achieved in former Yugoslavia. The
more countries can be torn into pieces and dissolved into rival
factions, the more powerful is Washington.

Russia’s Putin understands that Russia itself is threatened not only
by Washington’s funding of the “Russian opposition,” but also by the
strife among Muslims unleashed by Washington’s wars against secular
Muslim states, such as Iraq and Syria. This discord spreads into Russia
itself and presents Russia with problems such as Chechen terrorism.

When a secular state is overthrown, the Islamist factions become free
to be at one another’s throats. The internal strife renders the
countries impotent. As I wrote previously, the West always prevails in
the Middle East because the Islamist factions hate one another more than
they hate their Western conquerers. Thus, when Washington destroys
secular, non-Islamist governments as in Iraq and now targeted in Syria,
the Islamists emerge and battle one another for supremacy. This suits
Washington and Israel as these states cease to be coherent opponents.

Russia is vulnerable, because Putin is demonized by Washington and
the US media and because Putin’s Russian opposition is financed by
Washington and serves US, not Russian, interests. The turmoil that
Washington is unleashing in Muslim states leaks back to Russia’s Muslim
populations.

It has proved to be more difficult for Washington to interfere in
China’s internal affairs, although discord has been sowed in some
provinces. Several years from now, the Chinese economy is expected to
exceed in size the US economy, with an Asian power displacing a Western
one as the world’s most powerful economy.

Washington is deeply disturbed by this prospect. In the thrall and
under the control of Wall Street and other special interest business
groups, Washington is unable to rescue the US economy from its decline.
The short-run gambling profits of Wall Street, the war profits of the
military/security complex, and the profits from offshoring the
production of goods and services for US markets have far more
representation in Washington than the wellbeing of US citizens. As the
US economy sinks, the Chinese economy rises.

Washington’s response is to militarize the Pacific. The US Secretary
of State has declared the South China Sea to be an area of American
national interest. The US is wooing the Philippine government, playing
the China threat card, and working on getting the US Navy invited back
to its former base at Subic Bay. Recently there were joint
US/Philippines military/naval exercises against the “China threat.”

The US Navy is reallocating fleets to the Pacific Ocean and
constructing a new naval base on a South Korean island. US Marines are
now based in Australia and are being reallocated from Japan to other
Asian countries. The Chinese are not stupid. They understand that
Washington is attempting to corral China.

For a country incapable of occupying Iraq after 8 years and incapable
of occupying Afghanistan after 11 years, to simultaneously take on two
nuclear powers is an act of insanity. The hubris in Washington, fed
daily by the crazed neocons, despite extraordinary failure in Iraq and
Afghanistan, has now targeted formidable powers–Russia and China. The
world has never in its entire history witnessed such idiocy.

The psychopaths, sociopaths, and morons who prevail in Washington are leading the world to destruction.

The criminally insane government in Washington, regardless whether
Democrat or Republican, regardless of the outcome of the next election,
is the greatest threat to life on earth that has ever existed.

Moreover, the only financing the Washington criminals have is the
printing press. In a subsequent column I will examine whether the US
economy will complete its collapse before the war criminals in
Washington can destroy the world.

“Shot
on the front lines and meeting spaces of the Occupy movement in NYC,
Boston, and Washington, DC from the earliest days through the end of
January 2012 American Autumn: an Occudoc is an inside looking out view
of the occupy movement.

Silent Spring For Us?

With her 1962 book, Silent Spring,
Rachel Carson got DDT and other synthetic pesticides banned and saved
bird life. Today it is humans who are directly threatened by
technologies designed to extract the maximum profit at the lowest
private cost and the maximum social cost from natural resources.

Once abundant clean water has become a scarce resource. Yet, in the
US ground water and surface water are being polluted and made unusable
by mountain top removal mining, fracking and other such “new
technologies.” Ranchers in eastern Montana, for example, are being
forced out of ranching by polluted water.

Offshore oil drilling and chemical farming run-off have destroyed
fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. In other parts of the world, explosives
used to maximize short-run fish catches have destroyed coral reefs that
sustained fish life (http://aquatek-california.com/coral-reef-destruction/).
Deforestation for short-run agricultural production results in
replacing bio-diverse rain forests with barren land. The “now
generation” is leaving a resource-scarce planet to future generations.

Nuclear power plants are thoughtlessly built in earthquake and tsunami zones.
Spent fuel rods are stored within the plants, a practice that adds
their destructive potential to a catastrophic accident or act of nature.

The newest threat comes from genetically modified seeds that produce
crops resistant to herbicides. The active ingredient in Monsanto’s
Roundup herbicide is glyphosate, a toxic element that now contaminates
groundwater in Spain and according to the US Geological Survey is now
“commonly found in rain and streams in the Mississippi River Basin.”

In 2011 Don Huber, a plant pathologist and soil microbiologist, wrote
to the US Secretary of Agriculture about the unexpected consequences of
GMOs and the accompanying herbicides. He cited adverse effects on
critical micronutrients, soil fertility, and the nutritional value of
foods. He cited the impairment of metabolic pathways that prevents
plants from accumulating and storing minerals, such as iron, manganese,
and zinc, minerals important for liver function and immune response in
animals and people. He cited toxic effects on the microorganisms in the
soil that have disrupted nature’s balance and resulted in large
increases in plant diseases. He cited livestock deaths from botulism,
premature animal aging, and an increase in animal and human infertility.

In an interview, Huber said that the power of agri-business has made
it almost impossible to do research on GMOs and that regulatory agencies
with the responsibility of protecting the public are dependent on the
industry’s own self-serving studies and have no independent objective
science on which to base a regulatory decision.

In short, in order to secure bumper crops for several years, we are destroying the fertility of soil, animal and human life.

Mankind has been destroying the world for a long time. In his fascinating book, 1493,
Charles C. Mann describes the adverse effects on the environment,
people, and civilizations of the globalism unleashed by Christopher
Columbus. These include the international transfer of human and plant
diseases, deforestation, destructions of peoples and empires, and the
impact on distant China of Spanish new world silver.

Mann provides a history lesson in unintended and unexpected
consequences resulting from the actions of elites and of those that
elites dominated. The Chinese government fixed taxation in terms of the
quantity of silver, but the importation of Spanish silver inflated
prices (decreased the value of a given quantity of silver) and left the
government without sufficient revenues.

A successor government or dynasty evicted Chinese from the coast in
order to deprive pirates of resources. The displaced millions of people
deforested mountainsides in order to sustain themselves with terrace
agriculture. The result of deforestation was floods that not only washed
away the terraces but also the crops in the fertile valleys below.
Consequently, floods became one of China’s greatest challenges to its
food supply.

The first slaves were conquered new world natives, but the “Indians”
had no immunity to European diseases. The second wave of slaves were
European whites, but the Europeans had no immunity to malaria and yellow
fever. By default slavery fell to blacks, many of whom had immunity to
malaria and yellow fever. Thus, a black workforce could survive the
infected environments and newly created wetlands in which to raise
sugarcane, wetlands that were ideal homes for malaria and yellow fever
bearing mosquitoes. Mann, of course, is merely reporting, not
justifying black or any slavery.

Mann points out that the lowly mosquito had a large impact on
American history. The Mason-Dixon Line roughly splits the East Coast
into two zones, the South in which disease carrying mosquitoes were an
endemic threat, and the north in which malaria was not a threat. In the
South, a person who survived childhood and grew into an adult had
acquired immunity. Northerners had no such protection.

This had enormous consequences when Northern armies invaded the
South. Mann reports that “disease killed twice as many Union troops as
Confederate bullets or shells.” Between the summers of 1863 and 1864,
the official annual infection rate for what was called “intermittent
fevers” was 233 percent. The average northern soldier was felled more
than twice. In one year 361,968 troops were infected. Most of the
deaths from malaria were indirect. The disease so badly weakened the
troops that they died from dysentery, measles or strep infection.

The mosquito was the South’s most powerful ally and so prolonged the
war, despite the vast numerical superiority of the Union force, that
Lincoln was forced to take action that he opposed and declare
emancipation of slaves. Thus, Mann writes, it is not farfetched to
conclude that blacks were freed by the very malaria mosquito that had
caused blacks to be the preferred workforce.

Mann shows that long before the birth of capitalism, greed drove men
to barbarous treatment of their fellows. He also shows that policies,
whether driven by greed or by well-intended socio-political design,
inevitably had unexpected consequences. His multi-faceted history well
illustrates the old adage, “the well laid plans of mice and men often go
awry.”

The old world’s colonization of the new world devastated new world
peoples, but the new world bit back with the spread of the potato blight
to Europe and Spanish and European inflation.

Today the prospects for the planet are different. The human
population is vast compared to earlier times, putting far more pressure
on resources, and the disastrous consequences of new technologies are
unknown at the time that they are employed, when the focus is on the
expected benefits. Moreover, these costs are external to the business,
corporation, or economic unit. The costs are inflicted on the
environment and on other humans and other animal life. The costs are not
included when the business calculates its profit and return on its
investment. The external costs of fracking, mountain top removal
mining, chemical farming, and GMOs could exceed the value of the
marketable products.

Businesses have no incentive to take these costs into account,
because to do so reduces their profits and could indicate that the full
cost of production exceeds the value of the output. Governments have
proven to be largely ineffective in controlling external costs, because
of the ability of private interests to influence the decisions of
government. Even if one country were to confront these costs, other
countries would take advantage of the situation. Companies that
externalize some of their costs can undersell companies that internalize
all of the costs of their production. Thus, the planet can be
destroyed by the short-term profit and convenience interests of one
generation.

The main lesson that emerges from Mann’s highly readable book is that
people today have no better grasp of the consequences of their actions
than superstitious and unscientific people centuries ago. Modern
technological man is just as easily bamboozled by propaganda as ancient
man was by superstition and ignorance.

If you doubt that the peoples of Western civilization live in an
artificial reality created by propaganda, watch the documentary on
psyops at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZiAV6fU2NM&feature=player_embedded#!
The documentary does a good job despite wandering off into a couple of
side issues on which it takes one-sided positions. It is a bit heavy
on blaming the rich, and overlooks that Stalin, for example, had plenty
of propaganda and wasn’t looking to make himself a billionaire. Not all
the rich are against the people. Billionaires Roger Milliken and Sir
James Goldsmith fought against jobs offshoring and globalism, which
increases the powerlessness of the people vis-a-vis the elites. Both
spoke for the people to no avail.

The documentary also blames the Constitution for limiting the
participation of the mass of the people in governing themselves without
acknowledging that the Constitution restricted the power of government
and guaranteed civil liberty by making law a shield of the people
instead of a weapon in the hands of the government. It is not the
Constitution’s fault, or the fault of Founding Father James Madison,
that the American people succumbed to propaganda by Bush and Obama and
gave up their civil liberty in order to be “safe” from “Muslim
terrorists.”

The documentary shows that propaganda is a form of mind control, and controlled minds are indeed the American predicament.

In 1962 Rachel Carson caught Monsanto off guard and thus gained an
audience. Today she would not get the same attention. Ready and waiting
psyops would go into operation to discredit her. I just read an article
by an economist who wrote that economists have decided that
environmentalism is a religion, in other words, an unscientific belief
system that preaches “religious values.” This demonstrates what little
importance economists attribute to external costs and the ability of
externalized costs to destroy the productive power of the planet. Thus,
the question, “silent spring for us?” is not merely rhetorical. It is
real.

______________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Roberts’ latest book is Economies in Collapse: The Failure of
Globalism, published in Europe, June, 2012. Seller information will be
made available as soon as possible.

Corn is the second-most important GM crop worldwide,
growing in 18 countries.
GM corn includes insect-resistant and
herbicide-tolerant varieties, and unlike
soybeans, some GM corn has both
modifications 'stacked' together. (photo: Reuters)

Biotech Leader Covered Up Animal Deaths From GM Corn

By Anthony Gucciardi, Natural Society

16 June 2012

In a riveting victory against genetically modified creations, a major
biotech company known as Syngenta has been criminally charged for
denying knowledge that its GM Bt corn actually kills livestock.
What's more is not only did the company deny this fact, but they did so
in a civil court case that ended back in 2007. The charges were finally
issued after a long legal struggle against the mega corp initiated by a
German farmer named Gottfried Gloeckner whose dairy cattle died after
eating the Bt toxin and coming down with a ‘mysterious' illness.

Grown on his own farm from 1997 to 2002, the cows on
the farm were all being fed exclusively on Syngenta's Bt 176 corn by the
year 2000. It was around this time that the mysterious illnesses
began to emerge among the cattle population. Syngenta paid Gloeckner
40,000 euros in an effort to silence the farmer, however a civil lawsuit
was brought upon the company. Amazingly, 2 cows ate genetically modified maize (now banned in Poland over serious concerns) and died.
During the civil lawsuit, however, Syngenta refused to admit that its
GM corn was responsible. In fact, they went as far as to claim having no
knowledge whatsoever of harm.

The case was dismissed and Gloeckner, the farmer who
launched the suit, was left thousands of euros in debt. And that's not
all; Gloeckner continued to lose many cows as a result of Syngenta's
modified Bt corn. After halting the use of GM feed in 2002, Gloeckner
attempted a full investigation with the Robert Koch Institute and
Syngenta involved. The data of this investigation is still unavailable
to the public, and only examined one cow. In 2009, however, the
Gloeckner teamed up with a German action group known as Bündnis Aktion
Gen-Klage and to ultimately bring Syngenta to the criminal court.

Using the testimony of another farmer whose cows died
after eating Syngenta product, Gloeckner and the team have charged the
biotech giant for the death of over 65 cows, withholding knowledge of
the death-link, and holding the corporation liable for not registering
the cattle deaths. The team is even charging Hans-Theo Jahmann, the
German head of Syngenta, personally over the withholding of knowledge.

The charges bring to light just how far large
biotechnology companies will go to conceal evidence linking their
genetically modified products to serious harm. Monsanto, for example,
has even threatened to sue
the entire state of Vermont if they attempt to label its genetically
modified ingredients.

Why are they so afraid of the consumer knowing
what they are putting in their mouths?

Monsanto: A Modern Day Plague

By Lisa Cerda, City Watch Los Angeles

19 June 2012

onsanto's
history is one steeped with controversial products, deadly
consequences, massive cover ups, political slight of hand, and
culminates as a modern day plague on humanity, a plague that is about to
peak to biblical proportions. Created in 1901, the company started
producing its first form of poison, the artificial sweetener saccharin.
The rise in use of saccharin really began 70 years later. Monsanto had
plenty of time for a realistic and long term study on the impact of
saccharin on human health. Instead, Monsanto learned how to finagle
political support and grow its empire despite the growing consensus that
saccharin caused cancer.

No surprise then that the company continued on a path of controversy. Here's a bullet point history.

Contributed to the research on uranium, for the Manhattan Project, during WWII.

Operated a nuclear facility for the U.S. government until the late 1980s.

Top manufacturer of synthetic fibers, plastics and polystyrene
(EPA's 5th ranked chemical production that generates the most hazardous
waste).

Monsanto Filed 144 lawsuits against struggling farmers and settled
out of court with 700 farmers, for reportedly violating seed patents. A
full time staff of 75 Monsanto employees investigates patent
infringement. They are dedicated solely to finding farms that have been
contaminated by their unwanted seed. As of 2007, Monsanto was awarded in
57 recorded judgments against farmers a total of $21,583,431.99. Monsanto vs. Farmers click here.

The Washington Post reported, "For nearly 40 years,
while producing the now-banned industrial coolants known as PCBs at a
local factory, Monsanto Co. routinely discharged toxic waste into a west
Anniston creek and dumped millions of pounds of PCBs into oozing
open-pit landfills. And thousands of pages of Monsanto documents -- many
emblazoned with warnings such as 'CONFIDENTIAL: Read and Destroy' show
that for decades, the corporate giant concealed what it did and what it
knew."

PCB's are considered an absolute threat to our world.
Environmentalists rightfully want a pound of Monsanto's flesh! In 1969,
Monsanto knew the impact of their products and put together an
abatement plan for the entire United States, Canada and sections of
Europe, especially the UK and Sweden. It's disingenuous to suggest it
could be done, for any amount of money. In the town of Anniston,
Alabama, where the Monsanto plant was located, residents had PCB levels
hundreds and sometimes thousands of times higher than the average
person. They were dying or ill.

Monsanto decided to look at other products they could
produce because their economic reliance on one profitable product was
precarious at best. They split the company and Monsanto spawned Solutia,
so that the massive lawsuits would not take down the entire company.
Found guilty of conduct "so outrageous in character and extreme in
degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency so as to be
regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in civilized society." The
court decisions were destroying profitability.

Monsanto was just getting started with its assault on
our ecosystem. Roundup was being marketed in 115 countries. Meanwhile
Solutia was going down by means of Chapter 11 bankruptcy and lawsuits.

With the popularity of Roundup, the company became
increasingly concerned about the patents expiration in 2000. They sold
off the plastics division in 1996 and their phenylalanine facilities in
1999. Here again, Monsanto was trying to avoid financial liability for
its hazardous waste producing past.

Monsanto merged with Pharmacia, and became legally a
different corporation, despite sharing the same name, the same corporate
headquarters, the same executives and employees, not to mention most of
the liabilities from its former activities.

The new focus was genetic engineering and particularly
creating genes that are resistant to glyphosate, the active ingredient
in Roundup. Can you imagine farming without weeds? Farmers were
intrigued and some delighted. Growing food and spraying poison at the
same time did nothing to boost the confidence of consumers. False claims
that it was biodegradable lead to its frequent use. Health complaints
came from neighbors of farmers and farmers themselves. Soon the
biodegradable claim on the packaging was removed.

Heading in a new direction, Monsanto was buying up
seed companies left and right. They became the world's largest seed
company, acquiring a quarter of the global proprietary seed market. By
coupling their sale of Roundup with their gene modified seeds, they
began dominating the agriculture market. By 2007, almost 90% of the
world used GM seeds carrying at least one genetic trait for herbicide
tolerance. Now Monsanto was a dominating the food chain, the farmers,
and its assault on mankind.

Where there is market control, there is price gouging.
In 2006 Roundup cost $32 per gallon, and by 2008 it was up to $75 per
gallon. Not satisfied with this dominance of the world food chain,
Monsanto began patenting their glyphosate resistant seeds. They hiked up
the price of corn seeds by 35% and soy by 50%, leaving farmers
financially plundered. Farmer suicide went from a trickle to a
torrential rain. Averaging about one farmer suicide every 30 minutes.

Soy, corn, sugar beets, rice, alfalfa, cotton seed
oil, canola oil, Hawaiian papaya, zucchini, crookneck squash are now the
sources of genetically food. But it gets worse. Corn and soy products
are being fed to livestock, the livestock that you eat; chicken, eggs,
sheep, pig, cows, goats, turkey, etc. Unless you have removed meat from
your diet you are being systematically poisoned and perhaps even
sterilized like the livestock that eats GMO corn and soy products.

The rights of farmers to save or exchange seeds have
been stolen from them. Something that has been done for centuries, that
guaranteed the survival of our species, changed overnight. Like a game
of chess, Monsanto has with absolute intent, created a food crisis,
offered up its poisonous solution, and has knocked chess piece after
chess piece down in a calculated plan.

Just look at the list of players behind the schemes
and profiteering. Monsanto, U.S. regulators and judicial bodies have
become strange bed fellows:

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, a former Monsanto lawyer, wrote the majority of the opinion in a key Monsanto case.

Lawyer Michael Taylor, FDA employed, represented Monsanto sometime
after, then returned as the FDA's Deputy Commissioner for Policy right
as rBGH was granted approval. He was appointed as a senior adviser to
the Food and Drug Administration (United States) Commissioner on food
safety in August 2009 by President Barack Obama.

Dr. Michael A. Friedman, prior deputy commissioner of the FDA, hired as a senior vice president of Monsanto.

Linda J. Fisher, prior assistant administrator at the US
Environmental Protection Agency, became a vice president at Monsanto
from 1995-2000. In 2001, Fisher returned as the deputy administrator of
the EPA.

Donald Rumsfeld, Former Secretary of Defense, former chairman and
chief executive officer of G. D. Searle & Co., (Monsanto purchased
in 1985). Rumsfeld privately made at least $12 million from the
transaction.

If by now you are feeling paranoid, targeted, and overwhelmed by this information, I understand why.

You will move through all the stages of rage in time.
Resist the urge to kick the produce man. Don't hire a plane to spray
Roundup on the White House, Senate, or House, I don't advocate stooping
to their levels.

But you may want to go picket in front of Whole Foods
after you read their blog explaining why they buckled under the pressure
of the USDA and Monsanto. Whole Foods, the very symbol of health
conscious living, has betrayed everything they stood for to the
consumer. Read Whole Foods Blog here.

Now Monsanto can push full steam ahead, contaminating
our nation's 25,000 organic farms and ranches. Top executives from Whole
Foods Market, Stonyfield Farm and Organic Valley have given up on their
12 year battle to protect consumer's choices.

This decision sets a precedence for how genetically
engineered foods will be regulated in the future. You can now expect the
spread Monsanto's mutant genes and seeds across the nation,
contaminating other farms, and taking down other farmers by lawsuits.

A Swedish study found that spraying Roundup doubles
the risk of getting cancer for farm workers' and rural residents'. More
worrisome is the fact that Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) do not
require safety testing, nor labeling identifying them as GMOs.

Anti- GMO efforts by organic companies, who demanded
labeling and oversight, will begin to accept the so-called "natural"
foods that are routinely contaminated with GMO's. Companies like
Wal-Mart, Kroger, Costco, Supervalu, Publix, Target and Safeway shy away
from the attacks on GMO's that they sell to their unwitting customer
base.

Whole Foods' already sells "Natural" processed foods
and animal products that are contaminated with GMOs. At least two thirds
of WFM's $9 billion annual sales is derived products that are
contaminated with GMOs. Whole Foods' moral high ground is looking more
like a sink hole. This constitutes fraud in my book.

Consumers must learn the difference between products
marketed as "natural," and those products that are "certified organic."
Just because you're in a Whole Foods Market, does not mean your
expensive food is safe. They are misleading you by masquerading natural
as organic.

GMOs and organics cannot coexistence. They are polar
opposites in every way imaginable. GMOs destroys biodiversity, damages
the environment and public health, economically devastates farmers, and
destabilizes the climate.

In the European Union, all foods containing GMOs or
GMO ingredients must be labeled. Thus the market shelves are empty
because consumers are not buying them. American consumers want mandatory
labels on GMO foods, and according to the polls by a strong 85-95%.
They don't want the top poison producer, to monopolize the agricultural
industry and have anything to do with the worlds food supply.

Bush, Clinton, and Obama administrations have
prevented consumer GMO truth-in-labeling laws. A new bill by Congressman
Dennis Kucinich (Democrat, Ohio) calling for mandatory labeling and
safety testing for GMOs is in Congress now. But Monsanto is allowed to
buy vote's thanks in part to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, and
the Citizens United case. In 2010, big corporations and billionaires got
the right to spend obscene amounts of money to buy media coverage,
elections, and do it anonymously.

Recent news is … 5 million farmers are now suing
Monsanto. They are fighting for the right to use seeds from previous
year's harvests. Seeds they harvested, but Monsanto patented. The bad
news is … it's still GMO seeds, a toxic transgenic breed, in markets
without labels and health studies, and we have a government that finds
this all acceptable.

Sanders Releases Explosive Bailout List

Sen. Bernie Sanders, Reader Supported News

13 June 2012

ore
than $4 trillion in near zero-interest Federal Reserve loans and other
financial assistance went to the banks and businesses of at least 18
current and former Federal Reserve regional bank directors in the
aftermath of the 2008 financial collapse, according to Government
Accountability Office records made public for the first time today by
Sen. Bernie Sanders.

On the eve of Senate testimony by JPMorgan Chase CEO
Jamie Dimon, Sanders (I-Vt.) released the detailed findings on Dimon
and other Fed board members whose banks and businesses benefited from
Fed actions.

"This report reveals the inherent conflicts of
interest that exist at the Federal Reserve. At a time when small
businesses could not get affordable loans to create jobs, the Fed was
providing trillions in secret loans to some of the largest banks and
corporations in America that were well represented on the boards of the
Federal Reserve Banks. These conflicts must end," Sanders said.

The GAO study found that allowing members of the
banking industry to both elect and serve on the Federal Reserve's board
of directors creates "an appearance of a conflict of interest" and
poses "reputational risks" to the Federal Reserve System.

In Dimon's case, JPMorgan received some $391 billion
of the $4 trillion in emergency Fed funds at the same time his bank was
used by the Fed as a clearinghouse for emergency lending programs. In
March of 2008, the Fed provided JPMorgan with $29 billion in financing
to acquire Bear Stearns. Dimon also got the Fed to provide JPMorgan
Chase with an 18-month exemption from risk-based leverage and capital
requirements. And he convinced the Fed to take risky mortgage-related
assets off of Bear Stearns balance sheet before JP Morgan Chase acquired
the troubled investment bank.

Another high-profile conflict involved Stephen
Friedman, the former chairman of the New York Fed's board of directors.
Late in 2008, the New York Fed approved an application from Goldman
Sachs to become a bank holding company giving it access to cheap loans
from the Federal Reserve. During that period, Friedman sat on the
Goldman Sachs board. He also owned Goldman stock, something that was
prohibited by Federal Reserve conflict of interest regulations.
Although it was not publicly disclosed at the time, Friedman received a
waiver from the Fed's conflict of interest rules in late 2008.
Unbeknownst to the Fed, Friedman continued to purchase shares in
Goldman from November 2008 through January of 2009, according to the
GAO.

In another case, General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt
was a New York Fed board member at the same time GE helped create a
Commercial Paper Funding Facility during the financial crisis. The Fed
later provided $16 billion in financing to GE under this emergency
lending program.

Sanders on May 22 introduced legislation to prohibit banking industry and business executives from serving as directors of the 12 Federal Reserve regional banks.

Jamie Dimon Is Not Alone

During the financial crisis, at least 18 former and
current directors from Federal Reserve Banks worked in banks and
corporations that collectively received over $4 trillion in low-interest
loans from the Federal Reserve.

US Senator Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) Washington, DC June 12, 2012

Jamie Dimon, the Chairman and CEO of JP Morgan Chase, has served on
the Board of Directors at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since
2007. During the financial crisis, the Fed provided JP Morgan Chase with
$391 billion in total financial assistance. JP Morgan Chase was also
used by the Fed as a clearinghouse for the Fed's emergency lending
programs.

In March of 2008, the Fed provided JP Morgan Chase
with $29 billion in financing to acquire Bear Stearns. During the
financial crisis, the Fed provided JP Morgan Chase with an 18-month
exemption from risk-based leverage and capital requirements. The Fed
also agreed to take risky mortgage-related assets off of Bear Stearns
balance sheet before JP Morgan Chase acquired this troubled investment
bank.

Jeffrey Immelt, the CEO of General Electric, served on the New York
Fed's Board of Directors from 2006-2011. General Electric received $16
billion in low-interest financing from the Federal Reserve’s Commercial
Paper Funding Facility during this time period.

Stephen Friedman. In 2008, the New York Fed approved an application
from Goldman Sachs to become a bank holding company giving it access to
cheap Fed loans. During the same period, Friedman, who was chairman of
the New York Fed at the time, sat on the Goldman Sachs board of
directors and owned Goldman stock, something the Fed’s rules prohibited.
He received a waiver in late 2008 that was not made public. After
Friedman received the waiver, he continued to purchase stock in Goldman
from November 2008 through January of 2009 unbeknownst to the Fed,
according to the GAO. During the financial crisis, Goldman Sachs
received $814 billion in total financial assistance from the Fed.

Sanford Weill, the former CEO of Citigroup, served on the Fed's
Board of Directors in New York in 2006. During the financial crisis,
Citigroup received over $2.5 trillion in total financial assistance from
the Fed.

Richard Fuld, Jr, the former CEO of Lehman Brothers, served on the
Fed's Board of Directors in New York from 2006 to 2008. During the
financial crisis, the Fed provided $183 billion in total financial
assistance to Lehman before it collapsed.

James M. Wells, the Chairman and CEO of SunTrust Banks, has served
on the Board of Directors at the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta since
2008. During the financial crisis, SunTrust received $7.5 billion in
total financial assistance from the Fed.

Richard Carrion, the head of Popular Inc. in Puerto Rico, has served
on the Board of Directors of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since
2008. Popular received $1.2 billion in total financing from the Fed's
Term Auction Facility during the financial crisis.

James Smith, the Chairman and CEO of Webster Bank, served on the
Federal Reserve's Board of Directors in Boston from 2008-2010. Webster
Bank received $550 million in total financing from the Federal Reserve's
Term Auction Facility during the financial crisis.

Ted Cecala, the former Chairman and CEO of Wilmington Trust, served
on the Fed's Board of Directors in Philadelphia from 2008-2010.
Wilmington Trust received $3.2 billion in total financial assistance
from the Federal Reserve during the financial crisis.

Robert Jones, the President and CEO of Old National Bancorp, has
served on the Fed's Board of Directors in St. Louis since 2008. Old
National Bancorp received a total of $550 million in low-interest loans
from the Federal Reserve's Term Auction Facility during the financial
crisis.

James Rohr, the Chairman and CEO of PNC Financial Services Group,
served on the Fed's Board of Directors in Cleveland from 2008-2010. PNC
received $6.5 billion in low-interest loans from the Federal Reserve
during the financial crisis.

George Fisk, the CEO of LegacyTexas Group, was a director at the
Dallas Federal Reserve in 2009. During the financial crisis, his firm
received a $5 million low-interest loan from the Federal Reserve's Term
Auction Facility.

Dennis Kuester, the former CEO of Marshall & Ilsley, served as a
board director on the Chicago Federal Reserve from 2007-2008. During
the financial crisis, his bank received over $21 billion in low-interest
loans from the Fed.

George Jones, Jr., the CEO of Texas Capital Bank, has served as a
board director at the Dallas Federal Reserve since 2009. During the
financial crisis, his bank received $2.3 billion in total financing from
the Fed's Term Auction Facility.

Douglas Morrison, was the Chief Financial Officer at CitiBank in
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, while he served as a board director at the
Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank in 2006. During the financial crisis,
CitiBank in Sioux Falls, South Dakota received over $21 billion in total
financing from the Federal Reserve.

L. Phillip Humann, the former CEO of SunTrust Banks, served on the
Board of Directors at the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta from
2006-2008. During the financial crisis, SunTrust received $7.5 billion
in total financial assistance from the Fed.

Henry Meyer, III, the former CEO of KeyCorp, served on the Board of
Directors at the Federal Reserve Bank in Cleveland from 2006-2007.
During the financial crisis, KeyBank (owned by KeyCorp) received over
$40 billion in total financing from the Federal Reserve.

Ronald Logue, the former CEO of State Street Corporation, served as a
board member of the Boston Federal Reserve Bank from 2006-2007. During
the financial crisis, State Street Corporation received a total of $42
billion in financing from the Federal Reserve.

Welcome to Capital Account. Germany and
Greece faced off today in the Eurocup 2012 with German newspapers
pushing headlines like "bye Greeks, we can't save you today." But can
anyone in Europe save the monetary union from itself? Mario Monti,
Italy's technocrat prime minister says there is only one week left to do
it, but looking back at older headlines, it appears there have been
many times Europe had only "one week left," or "ten days left." What's
up with that?

And while we are on the topic of déjà vu...more
ratings downgrades were issued yesterday. This time, it was Moody's
downgrading 15 of the largest global banks, and its become a bit like
white noise. We get it, worries are widespread, so the question is where
is the safest place to hide from the tale risk of a worst-case scenario?
Will we see another credit crunch, or is the best case just more
"muddling through?"

If you thought that the fires at the World Trade Center twin towers, set
off by the horrific jetliner impacts of September 11, 2001, were the
cause of the destruction of those iconic skyscrapers, you may be
mistaken. Experts now cite evidence showing that high-temperature
incendiaries and explosives were planted throughout the twin towers and
the lesser-known 47-story Building 7, also destroyed later the same day.

So says a group of architects and engineers nearly 1700 strong,
represented by Richard Gage, AIA, founder of Architects & Engineers
For 9/11 Truth and the director/producer of a new documentary. Two years
in the making, the documentary "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts
Speak Out - FINAL EDITION " officially debuted today, with a red carpet
treatment and press conference at the Beverly Music Hall, after a
preliminary showing yesterday in San Diego's Joyce Beers Center.

Famed actor Ed Asner, host and narrator of AE911Truth's
micro-documentary "Architects & Engineers - Solving the Mystery of
WTC 7," joined Gage at the Beverly Hills kickoff and helped introduce
the film. Also lending some star power to the Beverly Hills opening
night was veteran Hollywood actor John Heard. High-rise architect Robert
McCoy, one of the respected building professionals featured in Experts
Speak Out, also attended the opening.

A variety of special guests will appear with Gage at other premiere
locations across the country, including experts featured in the film,
family members of 9/11 victims, and prominent public figures who support
9/11 Truth. Mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti and 9/11 family member
Bob McIlvaine, who made headlines with their explosive 9/11 interview by
Geraldo on Fox News in 2010, will attend the premiere screening in
Philadelphia on June 25.

The film features 43 experts in building engineering, physics,
chemistry, and other technical fields, plus a half-dozen psychologists
who discussed ... (full release here)

The international Panel also discovered that four massive aerial
practice exercises traditionally held in October were in full operation
on 9/11. The largest, Global Guardian, held annually by NORAD and the
U.S. Strategic and Space Commands, had originally been scheduled for
October 22-31 but was moved, along with Vigilant Guardian, to early
September.

Although senior officials claimed no one could have predicted using
hijacked planes as weapons, the military had been practicing similar
exercises on 9/11 itself -- and for years before it.

Blogger's Note: I was an eye witness to two such exercises in the vicinity of the Pentagon about 6 and 12 years before the 9/11 attacks. I thought that the first one was to examine the vulnerability of the Pentagon to such attacks so that protective countermeasures could be devised. But if this were true, it is mighty odd that no countermeasures of any kind were utilized in an attempt to repel the 9/11 attack. With a head start like that the Pentagon should have had the fire power of "Battlestar Galactica!" Why was no one disciplined for this gross failure?

The Panel, discovering widespread reports of confusion and delays in the
defense response, looked into who was overseeing the air defenses after
the second Tower was hit at 9:03 A.M.

Official sources claimed neither Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Joint Chiefs of
Staff Acting Chairman General Richard Myers (filling in for General
Hugh Shelton), nor war-room chief General Montague Winfield were
available to take command until well after the Pentagon was struck about
9:37.

Yet emerging documents and memoirs show that top leaders were engaged
earlier -- and later discussed a shootdown of the "let's roll" Flight 93
before debris was scattered widely around its alleged Shanksville,
Pennsylvania crash site.

Most intriguing is the mystery of who was running the Pentagon's war-room during the critical early hours.

These findings follow hard on the Kuala Lumpur Tribunal's May 15th
verdict that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld were guilty of torture and war
crimes.

There has been plenty of calamitous news surrounding the European
debt crisis. Greece is insolvent. Spain just got a big bank bailout,
and Ireland wants a new bailout deal. No matter how bad it looks in the
EU, Paul Craig Roberts says the problems in Europe are “nowhere near as big as the ones here.”
The U.S. is printing massive amounts of money to paper over the mess,
but it won’t work. Roberts says a collapse of the U.S. dollar could
happen at any moment. It could be
triggered by any number of things such as war or a derivatives
meltdown. When a former Assistant Treasury Secretary (under the Reagan
Administration) and a PhD in economics sounds the alarm bell, people
should take cover. Dr. Roberts says, “The cliff dive we are experiencing in housing isn’t over,” and precious metals prices are “being suppressed.” Roberts says, “Gold prices should be rising. Why? Because the debt is rising.” What is the reason why Dr. Roberts thinks the suppression game has gotten so intense? Dr. Roberts says, “The fact that they are driving the price down suggests to me the situation is getting more desperate.” Greg Hunter interviews Paul Craig Roberts one on one about these subjects and more.

Wisconsin Recall: The adjusted Final Exit Poll was forced to match an unlikely recorded vote

Wisconsin Recall: The adjusted Final Exit Poll was forced to match an unlikely recorded vote

Richard Charnin

June 6, 2012
Updated: June 20

The media and the exit pollsters have done it again.

Before the first votes were posted, the media reported that based on
the exit polls, the election was “too close to call”. But Walker won by
53.2-46.3%, a 173,000 vote margin. Assuming “too close to call” meant
that the exit poll indicated a 50/50 split, then there was a significant
7% discrepancy between the unadjusted exit poll and the recorded vote.
I believe that Barrett was actually leading the exit polls. Of
course, we will never know until the unadjusted exit polls are
released. In any case, what caused the unknown red shift?

According to the Wisconsin True Vote Model ,
Barrett was a likely 54-46% winner. Barrett should have won easily –
assuming the caveat of a fair election. But the election was very likely
stolen.

Forcing the exit poll to match the recorded vote

The Final Wisconsin adjusted exit poll (2547 respondents) indicated
that Walker had 53.0% (see the NY Times link below). The 0.2% difference
between the Final and the recorded vote was the result of the standard
policy of forcing the unadjusted poll to match the vote.

The pollsters claim that the exit poll had a 4.0% margin of error.
But they can’t mean the final, adjusted poll because it is always forced
to match the recorded vote within 0.5%.

Why did the media not provide the actual unadjusted exit poll
demographics? Was it because they knew that they would have to adjust
all the crosstabs to match a rigged recorded vote – and did not want the public to view the “adjustments”?

The Fraud Factor

And as is always the case, there was no mention of the fraud factor
in the mainstream media. There never is. To the exit pollsters and the
media, there is no such thing as election fraud.

The GOP employs overt voter disenfranchisement in plain sight by
robocalling voters with false information and having election workers
discourage voters from using paper ballots and vote on unverifiable
touchscreen DREs. But we are supposed to believe that right-wing voting
machine manufacturers would not stoop so low as to write malicious code
to covertly flip votes in cyberspace.

In 2010, Walker “won” by 52.2-46.6%, supposedly due to low-Democratic turnout.
Was the election a prologue of the recall?

In the recall, Democrats turned out in droves, they wanted Walker
gone. There was no way that the unpopular Governor would match, much
less exceed, his 2010 vote – if the votes were counted as cast. But that
is a quaint notion considering the overwhelming statistical evidence of systemic election fraud since 1988.

Implausible 2008 returning voters and 2012 vote shares

Obama had a 56.2% recorded share in Wisconsin and 63.3% in the
unadjusted exit poll (2.4% margin of error). Assuming Obama had a 60%
True Vote share, then to match the recall vote, Walker needed the
following:
1) 81% of McCain and 71% of Obama voters turned out.
2) He needed to win 25% of Obama and 95% of McCain voters.
3) He needed 46% of new voters who did not vote in 2010. The 2012 exit
poll indicates he had 45% and that new voters comprised 13% of the total
vote.

In order to win by his recorded vote, Walker needed a 10%
advantage in returning 2008 voters and a 20% advantage in net
defections. That is highly implausible.

Exit poll oddities

1) A full 5% of voters were not white or black. But their vote is n/a.
2) Philosophy: 13% of liberals voted for Walker?3) Party ID: 34% Democrat/ 35% Republican in a progressive state?4) Labor: Just 62% voted for Barrett?
5) Obama preferred by 51-44%, yet Barrett lost the recall by 53.2-46.3%?6) Barrett only got 81% of would-be Obama voters?7)Turnout:47% of recall were returning Walker 2010 and 34% Barrett? That’s a 13% difference. In 2010 Walker “won” by 52.2-46.6%.
8) Urban vote: Barrett had just 62% in big cities?

In the 1988-2008 presidential elections, there were 300 state exit
polls, of which 252 red-shifted from the poll to the vote in favor of
the Republican and 48 to the Democrat. Assuming zero fraud,
approximately 150 would be expected for each. The probability P that 252
would red-shift to the Republican is:
P = 1.3E-34 = Binomdist(62,75,.5,false)^4P = 1 in 8 billion trillion trillion

Of the 137 exit polls in which the MoE was exceeded, 134 moved in
favor of the Republicans (only 8 would be expected). Three favored the
Democrat. The probability P that 134 out of 300 would favor the
Republican is:
P= 5E-115 = Poisson (134, .025*300, false)P= 1 in 2 million trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion

In the Wisconsin recall Exit Poll notes (following the crosstabs), the
pollsters indicate there were 2547 exit poll respondents and that the
margin of error (MoE) was +/-4%. Presumably, this includes a 30% cluster
factor. But the MoE seems too high, considering the number of
respondents.

The theoretical MoE is given by the simple formula: MoE =.98/sqrt(n),
where n is the number of respondents. For the recall: MoE = 2.0% =
.98/sqrt(2547). It is 2.6% after adding the 30% cluster effect.

The National Exit Poll is always forced to match the recorded vote to
within 0.50%. Yet the pollsters claim that the MoE is 4.0%. Why do the
pollsters even bother to mention the MoE? It has no meaning since the
exit poll is always adjusted to match the recorded vote anyway.

If we had unadjusted exit poll data, the margin of error
would be applied to determine the interval where the vote share would
fall 95% of the time. This is why unadjusted exit polls are necessary.
The standard practice of forcing the exit poll to match the recorded
vote implicitly assumes zero fraud, i.e. the recorded vote is identical
to the True Vote. It never is.

About Richard Charnin
In 1965, I graduated from Queens College (NY) with a BA in
Mathematics. I later obtained an MS in Applied Mathematics from Adelphi
University and an MS in Operations Research from the Polytechnic
Institute of NY.
I started out as a numerical control engineer/programmer for a major
defense/aerospace manufacturer and then moved to Wall Street as a
manager/developer of corporate finance quantitative applications for
several major investment banks. I consulted in quantitative
applications development for major domestic and foreign financial
institutions, investment firms and industrial corporations.
In 2004 l began posting weekly "Election Model" projections based on
state and national polls. As "TruthIsAll", I have been posting election
analysis to determine the True Vote ever since.View all posts by Richard Charnin

About Me

B.S. in Physics, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1960 Ph.D. in Physics, Brown University, 1966. Fellow, American Physical
Society. Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Fellow, American Ceramic Society. Member, Geological Society of America, Research Physicist at Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), Washington, DC,
1967-2001. Fulbright-García Robles Fellow at Universidad Nacional
Autónoma de México, 1997. Invited Professor of Research at Universités
de Paris-6 & 7, Lyon-1, et St-Etienne (France) and Tokyo Institute
of Technology, 2000-2004. Adjunct Professor of Materials Science and
Engineering, University of Arizona, 2004-2005. Consultancy: impactGlass
research international, 2005-present.
Winner, one national and two international research awards and honored
by Brown University with a "Distinguished Graduate School Alumnus
Award." Author, 198 papers in peer-reviewed journals and books, Principal Author of 114 of these.